The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

Today's first salvo from the UK sunshine campaign.

Ah, it's David Miliband. He's coming to see us today. Let's here what joy he brings...

""If Scotland was to separate from the rest of the UK, our country would be in a race to the bottom with the nationalists competing on lower tax rates for the top and lower wages or living standards for everyone else."

So is this a commitment that Scottish Labour won't be contesting the Scottish election in 2016? Or is he conceding defeat 2 years in advance?

He's able to see and accept the reality within Scotland, which people like you are not.

You're supporting a campaign that plans a race to the bottom with rUK over corp tax. How has that passed you by?

According to the leader your countrymen voted for, that race to the bottom is essential for your country's future prosperity - in other words, if your country doesn't have that race to the bottom, it's more fucked than if it does.

FFS. How is this stuff passing you by?

[LJS]

Yes, the SNP, and all supporters of the white paper.

What part don't you get? That's the vision you're supporting.

Apologies if I didn't make myself clear. What I should have said has anyone IN THIS THREAD come out in support of tax cuts for the rich?

[LJS]

He's able to see and accept the reality within Scotland, which people like you are not.

You're supporting a campaign that plans a race to the bottom with rUK over corp tax. How has that passed you by?

Wrong again. That is not what I am supporting, he explained for what seemed like the thousandth time!

[eFestivals]

Apologies if I didn't make myself clear. What I should have said has anyone IN THIS THREAD come out in support of tax cuts for the rich?

you might not be voicing support for that, but you'll happily vote for a scenario that will cause that to happen, while believing yourself to be supporting something of the left.

If you join up the dots into a coherent whole, you see all sorts of things that remain hidden to the blind.

[eFestivals]

Wrong again. That is not what I am supporting, he explained for what seemed like the thousandth time!

Then tell the SNP to withdraw their bullshit, and instead tell them that a nation needs that's nation's support.

Tell the people of Scotland to not vote in support of the SNP's bullshit, tell them to vote for a nation.

But you never do, not even with a few words here.

[LJS]

Enjoying your cheery banter as always, Neil.

[eFestivals]

Enjoying your cheery banter as always, Neil.

you say you don't support the SNP, but you can't utter one word in condemnation of how they're trying to con Scotland.

[eFestivals]

Which only gets to mean you're another one who is happy to win the vote on bullshit, and so proving the Scots have no more political respect for Scotland than anything that's ever happened from Westminster.

But it's going to work so differently, eh?

Edited April 25, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

I have explained my views on the SNP & the reasons why I am voting yes.

As usual you ignore what other folk say.

Well done on managing a few posts without mentioning jam

[eFestivals]

Nope, I'm not ignoring you. I'm going with you saying you don't support the SNP.

In which case you shouldn't have any problem condemning some of their actions, should you?

Go on ... you can say "the SNP are telling the people of Scotland some big lies about future oil revenues. They're far higher than than the best estimates from Scotland's oil industry".

It's the truth, after all.

[kaosmark2]

I reckon LJS is voting yes in a spate of naive optimism that an alternative might not be quite as crap as what we have now.

As someone who voted Lib Dem at the last election, I feel his pain.

[eFestivals]

I reckon LJS is voting yes in a spate of naive optimism that an alternative might not be quite as crap as what we have now.

As someone who voted Lib Dem at the last election, I feel his pain.

As I've pointed out, if the independence dream had happened around 10 years ago it would have been a LOT more crap for Scotland than the (in comparison) mild discomfort of tory austerity.

There's an awful lot that's crap with the UK, but you don't put yourself in a better position by getting the same bollocks from your politicians but with a much weaker financial position.

[LJS]

Scottish independence: CBI to reverse referendum stance Business lobby group the CBI is to reverse its position as a registered campaigner opposed to Scottish independence, the BBC has learned.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27159618

Interesting!

Not suggesting this is of massive significance but does look rather like another own goal for the No Campaign.

[LJS]

I reckon LJS is voting yes in a spate of naive optimism that an alternative might not be quite as crap as what we have now.

As someone who voted Lib Dem at the last election, I feel his pain.

Now, I'll take that as a compliment ( its the closes I get around here)

Yes I'm being optimistic- I've tried to explain on a few occasions why I don't think I'm being entirely naive... but I could be wrong.

I hope to find out

[LJS]

As I've pointed out, if the independence dream had happened around 10 years ago it would have been a LOT more crap for Scotland than the (in comparison) mild discomfort of tory austerity.

other "what ifs" are availabe.

[Buff124]

What people in Scotland think and what other people think that people in Scotland think can be a bit, well, divergent. Not often I quote a journalist, but this spells out what we already know (even if Neil wants to be deliberately obtuse about it for the sake of an argument)

Holyrood Week, by Stewart Paterson 25/4/14

"The positions both sides are taking just now are just that, pre-negotiation stances on what they want in the best-case scenario, if everything was to go their way."

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/opinion/columnists/somethings-got-to-give-if-scotland-says-yes-160945n.24035208

[eFestivals]

Not suggesting this is of massive significance but does look rather like another own goal for the No Campaign.

You're going to vote with what you believe to be your interests. The CBI are representing their own interests in just the same way (cos any possible barriers to trade or even extra admin is bad for businesses).

But it's an "own goal" to state your view if your view is 'no'? Is this another of those sophisticated things that only the Scots would understand?

[eFestivals]

other "what ifs" are availabe.

But not ones with such certainties to them.

That "what if" is what would have happened if this vote had been ten years ago. It's laughable to pretend otherwise.

[eFestivals]

What people in Scotland think and what other people think that people in Scotland think can be a bit, well, divergent. Not often I quote a journalist, but this spells out what we already know (even if Neil wants to be deliberately obtuse about it for the sake of an argument)

Holyrood Week, by Stewart Paterson 25/4/14

"The positions both sides are taking just now are just that, pre-negotiation stances on what they want in the best-case scenario, if everything was to go their way."

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/opinion/columnists/somethings-got-to-give-if-scotland-says-yes-160945n.24035208

the very fact that a journo needs to explicitly point it out in a Scottish newspaper gets to mean that plenty of people in Scotland don't get that's what it is.

(and that's still ignoring the lies, like the SNP's invented out of nothing oil estimates, which is the only way that the white paper financial projections come out as good as they do ).

Edited April 25, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

the very fact that a journo needs to explicitly point it out in a Scottish newspaper gets to mean that plenty of people in Scotland don't get that's what it is.

But anyway, now i've stopped laughing, it's good that it is being pointed out - because that's going to start to bring some people back down to earth, and then there's a chance they'll make their decisions with better knowledge.

I don't particularly mind which way people choose to vote (it's not like it's going to impact meaningfully on me), but I'd much rather they didn't cast a vote based on lies or having been misled.

[Buff124]

the very fact that a journo needs to explicitly point it out in a Scottish newspaper gets to mean that plenty of people in Scotland don't get that's what it is.

(and that's still ignoring the lies, like the SNP's invented out of nothing oil estimates, which is the only way that the white paper financial projections come out as good as they do ).

Several weeks ago (page 12?) we were arguing about this very thing. I was the one pointing out that *both* sides have simply set up pre-negotiation positions, and that you were reading waaay too much into it.

You've still got some black swans out there waiting to be discovered, I think .

[eFestivals]

Several weeks ago (page 12?) we were arguing about this very thing. I was the one pointing out that *both* sides have simply set up pre-negotiation positions, and that you were reading waaay too much into it.

Thing is, there's negotiating positions, and then there's negotiating positions. When the "negotiation" is actually attempted blackmail, that's not negotiation; it's offensive, and shows an untrustworthy negotiating partner, and an untrustworthy partner for a CU. And particularly when it's all based within a very selective reading of a UK govt statement.

And then there's political reality, a reality that Salmond could recognise ten years ago (when he was getting everything else wrong) but pretends to be something else now.

When a nation starts its life playing the highest stakes brinkmanship it's got few places left to go, plus it's not going to attract the friends it needs. The 'Uk's best politician' is anything but.

Edited April 25, 2014 by eFestivals

[Buff124]

When a nation starts its life playing the highest stakes brinkmanship it's got few places left to go, plus it's not going to attract the friends it needs. The 'Uk's best politician' is anything but.

and all within the context of a clear majority for a No vote in the referendum. What if we all know its just a bluff in order to get enough leverage for Devo-Max ? Y'know , control over everything apart from the stuff like currency union et al. What if we're all in on it ?

I'm sure this point has been argued about before, I remember posting a Bruno Bozzetti clip that illustrated it in a way.

[LJS]

But not ones with such certainties to them.

That "what if" is what would have happened if this vote had been ten years ago. It's laughable to pretend otherwise.

ah so it's only "what if the vote had happened 10 years ago?" that has certainties

Why would it have more certainties than my" what if the vote had taken place 30 years ago?" which was my initial response to your "what if".

Anyway how you can have any certainties in a "what if?" i don't know

What if we both just agree to forget "what ifs?"

[Buff124]

What if we both just agree to forget "what ifs?"

oh well that's the end of this entire thread then. it was good while it lasted. i'm missing it already